I know the source is from a creationist, so many may be turned off; but some of these ancient art is uncanny. http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino-art.htm I'm curious on both sides on this ancient art. Some of the are really accurate.
True, but some art is pretty particular to a stegosaurus in Asia. The temple was dated back thousands of years ago. Not trying to go creationist here. You should look at the pictures. It wasn't an alligator or snake. These were actual dinosaurs we know today
The carvings themselves are very interesting. The temples aren't all that old, however. We're talking about something built beginning in the 12th, I think. The implication from the site is that the carver is an eye witness to a stegosaurus in the 12th Century?
Well the unusual circumstance that even in the 12th century, there wasn't a stegosaurus fossil already learned about.
Reason why I brought this up is I'm watching ancient aliens and they talked about this shit. When I searched, most were from creationists
Seems plausible that the plates are in the background and meant to represent something else. The lack of tail spikes and the huge head (stegosaur had tiny heads) suggests that it isn't based off one.
I think if there were dinosaurs on the planet not even 1000 years ago, we'd have far more evidence. it's not like they were small.
There was a T. Rex fossil that still had red blood cells in the marrow. If that's true; carbon couldn't have existed longer than 20k years ago
You like science and seem pretty on point. The T. Rex fossil with red blood cells is impossible; even if it was in ice. Soft tissue cannot be preserved for 60+ millions of years
This isn't creation vs fucking evolution Denny. The link may get you all defensive or shit. Obviously your stubbornness is getting the better of you.
